Pat Robertson endorses Rudy

[Xavier_Onassis]

I don't think it is okay for anyone to be here illegally. But if they are sharing the highways with me, I would prefer that they be insured.

Kindly consider that I did not invite anyone to come here illegally,and I cannot prevent them from coming. I am not the Migra. I do not condone them being here, but I do recognize that they are here.

The state law says that they must be insured, but they cannot get insurance without a license.

Either send them all home or issue them a license. that simple.

Juniorbush's plan seemed like an improvement. I would have been happy had it passed.

First, they need to stop people from entering the country illegally.Then they need to send them back when they are stopped for not having a license/insurance or whatever. They don't do this now, by the way.

Then they need to make it easier for the people with skills we need to get in and to keep out all those we don't need.

But the reality is that they cannot and will not send 12,000,000 people back to Mexico, Haiti, Cuba or wherever.
 

[Amianthus]

I want our citizens to have a convenient, yet secure, way of showing that they are actually CITIZENS.

That document already exists; it's called a "passport." Only US citizens can get a US passport.<sup>1

1</sup> Actually, dual-nationals like me can get passports for each of our countries, but we are a small segment of the immigrant population.

[The_Professor]

I've never personally known someone who was a citizen of another country that was here legally. Not even on vacation.

Where the hell do you live?

Personally, I'm dual-national, but my parents and my sister are Austrian citizens. They've been living in the US for over 45 years, paying taxes, paying Social Security, etc. I know a large number of green card holders, personally.

Here's is what their resident alien cards look like:

I could be worng, but from a US perspective, you are NOT a dual citizen. Many other nations view it differently, but...

[Amianthus]

I could be worng, but from a US perspective, you are NOT a dual citizen. Many other nations view it differently, but...

You are correct. I am dual-national because the US claims me as a citizen (I was born in the US) and Austria claims me as a citizen (I am the child of Austrian citizens).  I never renounced either citizenship, so I can claim either as the situation warrants. I can travel to Cuba on an Austrian passport, for example.

[The_Professor]

This sounds cool. You can have your cake and eat it too! 

[Amianthus]

This sounds cool. Yo can have your cake and eat it too! 

Plays havoc with security clearances, though.

[R.R.]

Now CNN Caught Planting Question for Hillary

During last night's Democratic presidential candidates debate, UNLV student Maria Luisa asked the final question of the evening. Luisa laughingly asked Clinton: "Do you prefer diamonds or pearls?" Marc Ambinder reports that Luisa actually wanted to ask a substantive question about the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository, but CNN urged her to go with "diamonds or pearls" instead. Luisa writes on her MySpace page:

CNN ran out of time and used me to "close" the debate with the pearls/diamonds question. Seconds later this girl comes up to me and says, "you gave our school a bad reputation." Well, I had to explain to her that every question from the audience was pre-planned and censored. That's what the media does. See, the media chose what they wanted, not what the people or audience really wanted. That's politics; that's reality. So, if you want to read about real issues important to America and the whole world, I suggest you pick up a copy of the Economist or the New York Times or some other independent source. If you want me to explain to you how the media works, I am more than happy to do so. But do not judge me or my integrity based on that question.

[hnumpah]

[R.R.]

Post-Debate Questions    [Bill Bennett]


Why is everyone saying Hillary Clinton's performance was so boffo and her answer on licenses to illegals - "No" - was so cool when it directly contradicted her answer earlier this month? This is what Kerry did - in favor before he was opposed - that we flogged him for for the duration of the campaign.

Why isn't this an anchor?

And why right now aren't Republican candidates shouting about immigration from the rooftops and putting Dems in a box?

11/17 11:56 AM

[yellow_crane]

Post-Debate Questions    [Bill Bennett]


Why is everyone saying Hillary Clinton's performance was so boffo and her answer on licenses to illegals - "No" - was so cool when it directly contradicted her answer earlier this month? This is what Kerry did - in favor before he was opposed - that we flogged him for for the duration of the campaign.

Why isn't this an anchor?

And why right now aren't Republican candidates shouting about immigration from the rooftops and putting Dems in a box?

11/17 11:56 AM

The fact that the media is sorting out the place cards and stacking the deck in terms of questions is clear, or should be, to any one who watched this last Dem debate.

The audience was loaded, as well, by Hillary supporters.  When she made a point, they cheered; when others made a point, especially when they acted totally appropriately to the game at hand, and criticized her, they booed and hissed, almost to the point of interruption.  At one point, Obama became flummoxed by the catcalls from Hillary's supporters, and one could see Hillary gloating over it.  The fact that they had canned questions is not surprising, given the entrenched bias.

Edwards took some risks by implying that the whole of Washington is corrupt, and that measures that fail to address this, are doomed to failure.  Natually, Hillary took it personally.  She should.   She is too corrupt not to.  Her most recent behind the scenes cabals are with Rupert Murdock and others who were formerly a part of what she coined as the "right wing conspiracy."

Edwards made the best points, as objective political assesments are made, but the world watching also knows that Americans react to political debates with the same narcississtic tickling that their advertising and white house press releases have taught them to.   The "Ugly American" has been replaced by the "Gullible American" when it comes to describing your average 'consumer,' who used to be your average 'citizen.'

IMHO, the only outcome I am looking for in this election stack up is to determine if any chance, any objective opportunity will given to those who refer to the K Street, politician connection.

The rest is bullshit.

The same game with new players is still the same game, and the same problem.

Unbridled corruption.

[The_Professor]

Post-Debate Questions    [Bill Bennett]


Why is everyone saying Hillary Clinton's performance was so boffo and her answer on licenses to illegals - "No" - was so cool when it directly contradicted her answer earlier this month? This is what Kerry did - in favor before he was opposed - that we flogged him for for the duration of the campaign.

Why isn't this an anchor?

And why right now aren't Republican candidates shouting about immigration from the rooftops and putting Dems in a box?

11/17 11:56 AM

The fact that the media is sorting out the place cards and stacking the deck in terms of questions is clear, or should be, to any one who watched this last Dem debate.

The audience was loaded, as well, by Hillary supporters.  When she made a point, they cheered; when others made a point, especially when they acted totally appropriately to the game at hand, and criticized her, they booed and hissed, almost to the point of interruption.  At one point, Obama became flummoxed by the catcalls from Hillary's supporters, and one could see Hillary gloating over it.  The fact that they had canned questions is not surprising, given the entrenched bias.

Edwards took some risks by implying that the whole of Washington is corrupt, and that measures that fail to address this, are doomed to failure.  Natually, Hillary took it personally.  She should.   She is too corrupt not to.  Her most recent behind the scenes cabals are with Rupert Murdock and others who were formerly a part of what she coined as the "right wing conspiracy."

Edwards made the best points, as objective political assesments are made, but the world watching also knows that Americans react to political debates with the same narcississtic tickling that their advertising and white house press releases have taught them to.   The "Ugly American" has been replaced by the "Gullible American" when it comes to describing your average 'consumer,' who used to be your average 'citizen.'

IMHO, the only outcome I am looking for in this election stack up is to determine if any chance, any objective opportunity will given to those who refer to the K Street, politician connection.

The rest is bullshit.

The same game with new players is still the same game, and the same problem.

Unbridled corruption.

And yet study after study shows that people generally say Washington is currupted, BUT of course their local rep is REALLY GOOD...sigh. So, guess what? Nothing changes...

[Xavier_Onassis]

I doubt that Hillary is anywhere near as corrupt as Juniorbush/Cheney.
Pork barrel politics, ie spending excessive amounts of money in one's district is not per se corrupt, as selling one's vote to individuals as DeLay was doing. The 'Bridge to Nowhere' would have made life more convenient to the people in the area, and building it would have provided a lot of jobs. If Congressmen were more concerned with efficient government, bills like that bridge would never pass.

[BT]

Robertsons endorsement of Rudy means as much as UP'S endorsement of Paul.

In the end the only endorsement that matters is your own. Decide which candidate most closely matches your ideals then vote for them.

The rest of the endorsements much like NASCAR stickers are just efforts to herd the sheeple.